Advice from the Past

[mgshamster]

I was reading through some old 2e material and I came across this:


The madness rules that follow are intended to add flavor to the perils of Pandemonium. Problem is, all such rules run the risk of robbing players of control of their characters or demeaning their character's heroism. Consequently, the DM has to keep in mind that the rules are designed as a guide to roleplaying, not as a replacement for it. Other than where specific mechanics are given, players should apply these descriptions as seems to best fit their own characters' personalities. When player characters begin to fall prey to madness from Pandemonium's winds, the DM should explain the relevant section to their players, and then trust them to play the part. If a player feels uncomfortable with a situation, though, don't push. The point - as always - is to have fun.

I think this is fantastic advice. I can't remember the last time I saw such good advice written into the rules for a game. We certainly don't have it in this edition (at least not for madness in specific), and I don't recall it in 3.x, PF, or 4e.

What other little jewels have you found when reading through rulebooks?

[Fruitbat1919]

I think the DM guides in 4th had this message in them in theme, if not as directly written.

Funny thing is 2nd ed started off more role over rules, then they steadily tried to squeeze in more rules later on.

3rd and 4th tried to codify more rules from day one, but this message was still in some of the books - it did seem harder to get across to some groups and DMs though, as they seemed more invested somehow in rules. Maybe from computer game thinking? Maybe, maybe not.

Only just getting to grips with 5th, but it does seem to hold the message of role play and fun over rules.

[ad_hoc]

I was reading through some old 2e material and I came across this:



I think this is fantastic advice. I can't remember the last time I saw such good advice written into the rules for a game. We certainly don't have it in this edition (at least not for madness in specific), and I don't recall it in 3.x, PF, or 4e.

What other little jewels have you found when reading through rulebooks?

The madness of OotA is written in this way. There is a descriptor that you tell the player. It is then up to them to play their character that way.

[mgshamster]

The madness of OotA is written in this way. There is a descriptor that you tell the player. It is then up to them to play their character that way.

Not explicitly. It's how I've been running it, but it doesn't directly say what the madness rules in the Planes of Chaos says.

All OotA says is "here's when you make a roll to see if madness occurs, see DMG for more details. Here's how madness points rack up." And the DMG has even less to say on roleplaying the madness.

I'd agree that one can infer that to how it should be roleplayed - that it's up to the player to decide how to roleplay the description the books give, but nowhere does it give the kind of DM advice that is quoted in the OP.